Decision 1822E – Santee Elementary School District

LA-CE-4268-E

Decision Date: February 22, 2006

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 30
Perc Index: 72

Decision Headnotes

400.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE WITH, RESTRAINT, OR COERCION OF EMPLOYEES
400.01000 – In General; Standards

Two unalleged violations of interference found. The language of the Board Policy, “or other strike related activities” interferes with employee rights because of its ambiguity, the possibility of a broad interpretation in the future, and its chilling effect on employees’ protected rights. The language of the administrative regulation which threatens to eliminate employee payroll deduction privileges per se interferes with employees’ rights under EERA unalleged violations may be found if intimately related to complaint, part of respondent’s same conduct, fully litigated at hearing with respondent having opportunity to examine and cross examine witnesses.

406.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH STRIKES AND PICKETING
406.01000 – In General

Threatening discipline for engaging in “other such strike-related type activities” is interference because of its ambiguity, possibility of broad interpretation in the future and its resulting chilling effect on employee protected rights.

409.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; DEFENSES
409.03000 – Discontinuance of Illegal Activity; Retraction; Repudiation; Public Disavowal

The defense of retraction not available based on prospective disavowals of unlawful conduct. A opportunity to demand to bargain does not ameliorate an interference claim. Statement of rights language does not disclaim unlawful portion of AR.

601.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000)
601.01000 – In General, Per Se and Totality of Conduct; Prima Facie Case

A valid request to negotiate will be found if it adequately indicates a desire to negotiate on a subject within scope. (Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 223.) In this case, STA made a reasoned decision not to demand to barain the adoption of the Board Policy after being given 2 weeks notice of the Board’s intent. Protests over District’s contemplated change is not a demand to bargain.

601.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000)
601.03000 – Decision vs Effects Bargaining

An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and an opportunity to negotiate over the effects of its decisions that have an impact upon matters within scope. (Oakland Unified School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 540.) Union did not waive its right to negotiate the impacts of the Board Policy because it had waived its right to negotiate over the decision to adopt the BP.

601.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000)
601.04000 – When Duty Arises/Sufficiency of Bargaining Demand

A valid request to negotiate will be found if it adequately indicates a desire to negotiate on a subject within scope. (Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 223.) In this case, STA made a reasoned decision not to demand to barain the adoption of the Board Policy after being given 2 weeks notice of the Board’s intent. Protests over District’s contemplated change is not a demand to bargain. An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and an opportunity to negotiate over the effects of its decisions that have an impact upon matters within scope. (Oakland Unified School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 540.) Union did not waive its right to negotiate the impacts of the Board Policy because it had waived its right to negotiate over the decision to adopt the BP.

608.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES
608.07000 – Waiver by Union; Contract Waivers; Bargaining History Estoppel; Disclaimer; Supersession

A valid request to negotiate will be found if it adequately indicates a desire to negotiate on a subject within scope. (Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 223.) In this case, STA made a reasoned decision not to demand to barain the adoption of the Board Policy after being given 2 weeks notice of the Board’s intent. Protests over District’s contemplated change is not a demand to bargain. An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and an opportunity to negotiate over the effects of its decisions that have an impact upon matters within scope. (Oakland Unified School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 540.) Union did not waive its right to negotiate the impacts of the Board Policy because it had waived its right to negotiate over the decision to adopt the BP.

1103.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT
1103.01000 – In General

Unnecessary to amend the complaint because initial complaint already covers the District’s failure to engage in effects bargaining.

1103.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT
1103.03000 – Variance of Complaint from Charge; Evidence, Findings, or Order Varying from Complaint; Events Subsequent to Charge or Complaint

Unnecessary to amend the complaint because initial complaint already covers the District’s failure to engage in effects bargaining.

1105.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; EVIDENCE
1105.02000 – Background Evidence and Matters Not Alleged

Two unalleged violations of interference found. The language of the Board Policy, “or other strike related activities” interferes with employee rights because of its ambiguity, the possibility of a broad interpretation in the future, and its chilling effect on employees’ protected rights. The language of the administrative regulation which threatens to eliminate employee payroll deduction privileges per se interferes with employees’ rights under EERA unalleged violations may be found if intimately related to complaint, part of respondent’s same conduct, fully litigated at hearing with respondent having opportunity to examine and cross examine witnesses.

1107.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD
1107.04000 – Unalleged Violations

Two unalleged violations of interference found. The language of the Board Policy, “or other strike related activities” interferes with employee rights because of its ambiguity, the possibility of a broad interpretation in the future, and its chilling effect on employees’ protected rights. The language of the administrative regulation which threatens to eliminate employee payroll deduction privileges per se interferes with employees’ rights under EERA unalleged violations may be found if intimately related to complaint, part of respondent’s same conduct, fully litigated at hearing with respondent having opportunity to examine and cross examine witnesses.

1402.00000 – GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; WAIVER
1402.04000 – By Acquiescence/Conduct

A valid request to negotiate will be found if it adequately indicates a desire to negotiate on a subject within scope. (Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 223.) In this case, STA made a reasoned decision not to demand to barain the adoption of the Board Policy after being given 2 weeks notice of the Board’s intent. Protests over District’s contemplated change is not a demand to bargain. An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and an opportunity to negotiate over the effects of its decisions that have an impact upon matters within scope. (Oakland Unified School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 540.) Union did not waive its right to negotiate the impacts of the Board Policy because it had waived its right to negotiate over the decision to adopt the BP.

1402.00000 – GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; WAIVER
1402.05000 – By Delaying or Failing to Request Negotiations

A valid request to negotiate will be found if it adequately indicates a desire to negotiate on a subject within scope. (Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 223.) In this case, STA made a reasoned decision not to demand to barain the adoption of the Board Policy after being given 2 weeks notice of the Board’s intent. Protests over District’s contemplated change is not a demand to bargain. An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and an opportunity to negotiate over the effects of its decisions that have an impact upon matters within scope. (Oakland Unified School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 540.) Union did not waive its right to negotiate the impacts of the Board Policy because it had waived its right to negotiate over the decision to adopt the BP.